
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20516965 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516888 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516955 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516832 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516827 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516943 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516836 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516887 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516894 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516831 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516929 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516826 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516930 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516936 , 10.5281/zenodo.20517102 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516950 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516956 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516944 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516874 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516914 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516835 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516901 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516964 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516873 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516876 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516935 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516893 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516902 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516913 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516877
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20516965 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516888 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516955 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516832 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516827 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516943 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516836 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516887 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516894 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516831 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516929 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516826 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516930 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516936 , 10.5281/zenodo.20517102 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516950 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516956 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516944 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516874 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516914 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516835 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516901 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516964 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516873 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516876 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516935 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516893 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516902 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516913 , 10.5281/zenodo.20516877
48-state libcbm pool outputs under canonical B1.3 FIA EXPNS-anchored inventory stratification, plus 6-state libcbm vs GCBM density gap matrices (B1.1 v6 production parity and B1.3 FIA EXPNS), per-pool and per-DOM-pool decompositions, F3 Q10 mean annual temperature sensitivity sweeps for Georgia and Oregon, and the five publication figures supporting the PERSEUS multi-model forest carbon intercomparison methods finding. Headline findings: The previously reported +24% libcbm-vs-GCBM engine gap is reproduced in 5 of 6 states with full GCBM aggregates (WA, MN, IN, ME, OR all between 0.74 and 0.80) under canonical B1.1 v6 parity, with Georgia the lone outlier. Replacing uniform-FT B1.1 inventory with B1.3 FIA EXPNS (the canonical FIA Total Area Estimator) adds +6,760 TgC to the CONUS-wide carbon stock at n=39 states (+14 percent shift). The +24% engine gap carries a regional DOM-pool fingerprint driven by cool-moist climate spinup conditions: Pacific Northwest mean slow-soil pool 184 Mg/ha, Atlantic Maritime Northeast 143 Mg/ha, Lake States and South + Southeast around 105 Mg/ha. An F3 Q10 MAT sensitivity sweep on Oregon (MAT 4 to 13 C) confirms the slow-soil overshoot is spinup-driven, not runtime Q10-driven. Pipeline: All libcbm outputs were produced with the GCBM2hpc pipeline (github.com/holoros/GCBM2hpc) on the Ohio Supercomputer Center Cardinal cluster (allocation PUOM0008). 6-state GCBM aggregates were produced spatially via moja FLINT containerized GCBM at 1-degree WGS84 tiles. Auxiliary CONUS data: TreeMap 2022, LCMS v2024, FIA DataMart, NOAA 1991-2020 climate normals, EPA Level III ecoregions. Companion methods note: holoros.github.io/perseus-forest-intelligence/methods/inventory-stratification/
Companion dataset to the PERSEUS multi-model intercomparison methods paper (in preparation). Pipeline source github.com/holoros/GCBM2hpc.
GCBM, dead organic matter, slow soil pool, PERSEUS, libcbm, Forest Inventory and Analysis, intercomparison, inventory stratification, model intercomparison, CBM-CFS3, FIA EXPNS, forest carbon, moja FLINT, CONUS, Tier 3 carbon accounting, spinup climate, forest carbon model, EPA GHG inventory, Q10 sensitivity
GCBM, dead organic matter, slow soil pool, PERSEUS, libcbm, Forest Inventory and Analysis, intercomparison, inventory stratification, model intercomparison, CBM-CFS3, FIA EXPNS, forest carbon, moja FLINT, CONUS, Tier 3 carbon accounting, spinup climate, forest carbon model, EPA GHG inventory, Q10 sensitivity
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
